Towards the end of the TT yesterday, Paul said that that Sastre "reminds me of Lance Armstrong". This begs a few questions in my mind:
Is there any current rider less reminisicent of Armstrong than Carlos Sastre?
Do Phil and Paul actually watch the race, or do they spend the whole time talking while googling for 'Lance [censored]'?
Since Sastre won and he's Spanish, which is the same as Contador, plus CSC won despite Damsgaard, who also works with Astana... does this victory actually prove once-and-for-all that Johann Bruyneel is the bestest DS in the who-ole wide world?
Towards the end of the TT yesterday, Paul said that that Sastre "reminds me of Lance Armstrong". This begs a few questions in my mind:
Is there any current rider less reminisicent of Armstrong than Carlos Sastre?
Do Phil and Paul actually watch the race, or do they spend the whole time talking while googling for 'Lance [censored]'?
Since Sastre won and he's Spanish, which is the same as Contador, plus CSC won despite Damsgaard, who also works with Astana... does this victory actually prove once-and-for-all that Johann Bruyneel is the bestest DS in the who-ole wide world?
he meant "Satre reminds me (of receiving his blood transfusion like) Lance Armstrong"
Towards the end of the TT yesterday, Paul said that that Sastre "reminds me of Lance Armstrong". This begs a few questions in my mind:
Is there any current rider less reminisicent of Armstrong than Carlos Sastre?
Do Phil and Paul actually watch the race, or do they spend the whole time talking while googling for 'Lance [censored]'?
Since Sastre won and he's Spanish, which is the same as Contador, plus CSC won despite Damsgaard, who also works with Astana... does this victory actually prove once-and-for-all that Johann Bruyneel is the bestest DS in the who-ole wide world?
LOL, well I know what you mean, but I think Phil was talking about about the "tv shot" when the yellow jersey was reeling in his 3 minute man.
I like Paul and Phil, they make mistakes just like David Duffield on Eurosport but they are part of the furniture.
The best commentary for me was Duffield and Roche in the late '90's.
Towards the end of the TT yesterday, Paul said that that Sastre "reminds me of Lance Armstrong". This begs a few questions in my mind:
Is there any current rider less reminisicent of Armstrong than Carlos Sastre?
Do Phil and Paul actually watch the race, or do they spend the whole time talking while googling for 'Lance [censored]'?
Since Sastre won and he's Spanish, which is the same as Contador, plus CSC won despite Damsgaard, who also works with Astana... does this victory actually prove once-and-for-all that Johann Bruyneel is the bestest DS in the who-ole wide world?
One of the things that bothers me about P & P is that they will create false excitement by distorting the chances of a break succeeding or failing. On either Thursday or Friday when the break had the victory in the bag, Paul is still going on about how they cannot affort to play games, they might get caught, he has seen it happen before. They could have nearly walked to the line and still made it ahead of the chase group. They do this all the time: Instead of pointing out the obvious, they will lead the viewer on.
One of the things that bothers me about P & P is that they will create false excitement by distorting the chances of a break succeeding or failing. On either Thursday or Friday when the break had the victory in the bag, Paul is still going on about how they cannot affort to play games, they might get caught, he has seen it happen before. They could have nearly walked to the line and still made it ahead of the chase group. They do this all the time: Instead of pointing out the obvious, they will lead the viewer on.
Yeah. Its funny because Roll will be talking about how the breaak has succeeded. Then they cut to Phil and Paul and they are talking about the peloton closing down on the break.
One of the things that bothers me about P & P is that they will create false excitement by distorting the chances of a break succeeding or failing. On either Thursday or Friday when the break had the victory in the bag, Paul is still going on about how they cannot affort to play games, they might get caught, he has seen it happen before. They could have nearly walked to the line and still made it ahead of the chase group. They do this all the time: Instead of pointing out the obvious, they will lead the viewer on.
That sprint between M. Burghardt and the other guy (who is half Burghardt's size) was a perfect example. "Oh it's cat and mouse, [blah, blah, blah]". And then after Burghardt blows the other guy's doors off, Paul admits "he [the other guy] never really had a chance."
Still, Paul is quite lovable. And you gotta love how Paul and Phil never ceased to be amazed when someone is caught doping.
That sprint between M. Burghardt and the other guy (who is half Burghardt's size) was a perfect example. "Oh it's cat and mouse, [blah, blah, blah]". And then after Burghardt blows the other guy's doors off, Paul admits "he [the other guy] never really had a chance."
Still, Paul is quite lovable. And you gotta love how Paul and Phil never ceased to be amazed when someone is caught doping.
Except it's a show... like their false hype on the break succeeding (though I think Phil really is that bad at math). They truly want the viewer to believe that every doper is caught by testing positive... and that cyclists are that dumb to dope knowing they have a 100% chance of being caught.
Fark 'em. They know what's going on. They are more cynical than us the way they treat the viewer, Sherwen with a grin on his face. They know what they are paid to do I suppose. I consider them part of the doping problem.
Was it me or was Mario Aerrts in the lead group pretty much all the way to the bottom of Alpe d'huez unnoticed by Phil and Paul - i remember one point where he was right in front of the camera yet they never said anything.
